Patents and Innovation Economics

The underlying “scientific” basis for all environmentalism is the second law of thermodynamics or entropy. Environmentalist believe that entropy scientifically proves that we have peak oil problem, an over-population problem, a pollution problem, global warming and the myriad of other things environmentalist believe need to be fixed. It provides the moral basis for their argument that government must force people to quit using their cars, pro-creating, using ‘fossil fuels’, hydraulic fracturing, pesticides, irrigating, etc. According to environmentalists it also proves that technology can never solve these problems and the only solution is for humans to abandon technology and live in a “state of nature.” Entropy provides them the moral and scientific high ground in any debate and justifies any government intrusion into the private lives of people, including killing them.

Entropy causes things to become disordered according to environmentalists. One paper explains it this way:

Things fall apart because it’s the Law: the Second Law of Thermodynamics also referred to as the Law of Entropy. Everything disintegrate, degenerate, shatter, fracture, split, tear, break up, break down, break, rust, die, decay, wear out, rip, or move from a state of order to disorder; not unless new energy is infused for regular maintenance and rebuilding of its structure.[1]

The paper further explains, “Left unchecked, entropy will eliminate all life forms by randomizing vital life-sustaining molecules.” Jermy Rifkin, a leading environmentalist, has written a whole book about entropy, which argues that we need to use fewer resources to forestall the inevitable collapse of civilization. The most extreme version of this idea is called the Heat Death of the Universe, which states that the Universe will end up with a uniform temperature and uniform distribution of matter. Human’s are accelerating this process, according to the environmentalists and the more humans there are and the more energy they use the faster this is accelerated. Their answer is fewer humans and less technology. I wondered how they would tie entropy to anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) their favorite crisis right now. One paper entitled Entropy and Global Warming I, explains the connection this way.

Population Growth and intense per capita energy consumption may be seen to be at the root of virtually all of the world’s environmental problems. Global Warming, Depletion of Ozone Layer, Air Pollution, Ground Water Depletion, Chemical Risks, Pesticide Residue in Crops and in Fish.[2]

It appears that the tie between entropy and AGW is over-population.

When I point out that environmentalists are anti-human most people think either I am wrong or that I am exaggerating. But consider the following examples.

A leading environmentalist, Dr. Eric R. Pianka advocated the elimination of 90 percent of Earth’s population by airborne Ebola in front of few hundred members of the Texas Academy of Science who rose to their feet, and gave him a standing ovation.[3] Dr. Pianka attempted to deny this, but the evidence was overwhelming including his student evaluations.

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal,” Turner stated in 1996.[4]

Environmentalist killed over 100 million people in the 20th Century – but they won’t be satisfied until they have killed at least another 5 billion people.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS ARE EVIL

Marxists seem to be the main people who are pointing out that Environmentalists do not understand entropy. For instance, the paper The Limits to Entropy: the Continuing Misuse of Thermodynamics in Environmental and Marxist theory points out some of these errors.[5] This paper ends with the terrifying thought “The appropriation of misleading entropy concepts by Marxists is particularly unhelpful, since Marxist theory should be a guide for red-green political practice.” Another paper that disagrees with this entropy apocalypse is by the renown economist Julian L. Simon, entitled ENTROPY AND ENERGY ACCOUNTING: ARE THEY RELEVANT CONCEPTS?

Entropy in science is the energy in a system that cannot be used to do work and the second law of thermodynamics states that in an ISOLATED SYSTEM entropy always increases or stays the same. Entropy says nothing about order. In fact, crystalline structures have high entropy but are very ordered. A common example to explain this is provided by the article Entropy is Not Disorder, by Nathaniel Virgo.

Imagine filling a glass jar with water and cooking oil. Give it a good shake: the oil is now interspersed with the water. It’s an opaque, homogeneous mess. Very disordered. But now, leave the jar on the table for a few minutes. In the parlance of thermodynamics, this is a closed system (more or less — we can safely ignore the various ways in which it isn’t), so its entropy must increase over time. But as we watch, the oil separates from the water, forming a nice, orderly layer on top of it. The system, to the eye at least, appears to have become less disordered even as its entropy increased.

As a result, all the statements about entropy leading to disorder by environmentalist are just so much nonsense. In addition, the Earth is not an isolated system. An isolated system is one in which there is no energy or matter exchange occurs. Earth receives enormous amounts of energy from the Sun and exchanges it with the surrounding space. It also exchanges matter with space. Since gravity affects almost any system, almost no system can be consider isolated. The Universe might be an isolated system, but new theories about multiple universes, multiple dimensions, and that the Universe is likely infinite cast serious doubt on this. What this means is that Environmentalists supposed moral and scientific high ground is without any basis in fact. How anyone who advocate mass murder can be considered to have the moral high ground escapes me.

It is not surprising that environmentalist make these mistakes as most of them do not have a solid background in physics or chemistry. For instance, Jermy Rifkin, has a BA in economics and a MA in International Affairs.

Environmentalist Do Not Understand Entropy

Their Conclusions are Nonsense

They are Advocating and Implementing MASS MURDER Based on this Misinterpretation of Entropy

[1] Maharaj. Dr. Indar, ENTROPY:THE IMPACT OF A LOW-ENTROPY LIFE ON THE ENVIRONMENT

Environmentalists are often portrayed by the Media as lovable, good natured people; people who only want to save some adorable furry creature. Environmentalist groups target new technologies claiming that they are dangerous or unproven. The policies they advocate are anti-innovation and have destroyed advances in medicine, food production, power generation, vaccines, and more. These policies have resulted in the deaths of more people than Hitler, Stalin, and Moa combined. These deaths are not the result of good intentioned policies gone wrong; these policies are the purposeful goal of environmental groups. Environmentalists have consistently proven that they are willing to lie in order to achieve their objectives. Being “Green” is worse than being a Nazi, worse than being a Marxist; but these policies do work hand in hand with these statists philosophies.

I will briefly outline three environmentalist policy areas where environmentalists have lied about science. and even more important than lying, these policies have killed millions of people.

DDT

Silent Spring by Rachel Carson resulted in the banning of DDT.

Deaths Caused by DDT Ban

In 1970, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences estimated that DDT saved more than 500 million lives during the time it was widely used. Banning DDT has resulted in about 100 million deaths, many of whom were pregnant women and children. By comparison: Hitler killed about 6-7 million, Stalin killed around 10-14million, and Mao killed between 60-68 million.

FYI: The ban on DDT is why the US is currently having infestations of bed bugs; most people born after 1940 thought these were eradicated like polio.

Lies about DDT

Carson claimed DDT thinned the eggshells of birds. This was based on 1956 study by Dr. James DeWitt, published in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. However, DeWitt’s study actually showed that 50 percent more eggs hatched alive from the birds subjected to DDT than the non-DDT group. Other claims suggested that raptor populations declined because of the use of DDT; however, raptor populations were failing before the introduction of DDT. In fact, the Audubon’s Eagle counts from 1941 to 1961 actually increased when DDT was mostly widely used. All the latest evidence shows, Carson’s claims were nothing but outrageous lies.

“My own doubts came when DDT was introduced. In Guyana, within two years, it had almost eliminated malaria. So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem.”

“People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them, and this (referring to malaria deaths) is as good a way as any.”

Nuclear Power

Anti-Nuclear power activists claimed that nuclear power generation would result in the deaths of thousands of people. This movement was able to kill off the nuclear power industry in the United States after the Three Mile Island accident in which no one was killed and the average person within ten miles of the accident received the equivalent on one chest xray of radiation.

Deaths Caused by Nuclear Power Ban

The main alternative to nuclear power plants in the World ,to date ,have been coal fired plants. For each person killed by nuclear power generation (including deaths due to Chernoybal), 4,000 die from coal. The previous data is adjusted for how much power is produced by each method of power generation. The number of people killed per year in the US because of this change is at least 10,000. These deaths are mainly due to particulate pollution(nuclear power has no particulate pollution). This figure also includes an increase in the number of mining deaths, and increases in the number of deaths due to the extra transportation required to move coal compared to transporting uranium. In the United States alone: this environmental program has resulted in at least 300,000 deaths. Why has this not made headlines??! While the rest of the world has not followed the U.S.’s lead completely, the anti-nuclear movement has definitely retarded the development of nuclear power plants around the world. As a result, a reasonable estimate of the deaths worldwide because of the environmental policies is at least 600,000.

Nuclear power plants represent a huge reduction in air and water pollution. Real reductions in pollution are the result of advancing technologies, not regulator schemes such as the EPA has adopted. In fact, regulatory agencies can be credited with increasing pollution levels compared to what it would be without their influence.

The largest one time event fatality toll from energy production was in 1975. 30 dams in central China failed in short succession due to severe flooding. An estimated 230,000 people died. The fatalities and property destruction from this single event in hydropower far exceeds the number of deaths from all other energy sources. Of course, hydroelectric power is one of the environmentalists’ favorite source of power.

Lies about Nuclear Power

The number one lie is about nuclear power is that an accident could result in the death of thousands of people. Another boogey man of the environmentalists is that the half lives of byproducts from nuclear power lasts tens of thousands of years. What if the half life were infinite? Wouldn’t that be worse? If the half life were infinite, the element would be stable. Longer half lives mean that there is less radiation. Nuclear power plants accelerate the natural radioactive decay of uranium, so leftover fuel rods are less radioactive than the mined material.

Nuclear power plants are too expensive to make economic sense. This is another lie perpetuated by environmental groups.

Nuclear power is not intrinsically expensive. What drove nuclear plant costs up were environmentalist delays (caused by anti-nuclear “interveners” and the high interest financing rates—both perpetrated by those who wanted to kill nuclear power, and who now complain that nuclear costs too much. Shown here, in dollars per kilowatt are the rising costs of financing, environmentalist delays, and construction materials increases for nuclear (N) and the rising costs for comparable coal-fired plants (C) with sulfur removal.

Source: Electric Power Research Institute

Goal of Banning Nuclear power was to Kill People?

There does not appear to be any environmental wacko comments to this effect; certainly it hasbeen the result and since the environmentalism movement believes there are too many people-well, it seems this was likely part of their goal in killing off nuclear power.

Global Warming

Man made global warming or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is the latest hoax being thrust upon us by Environmentalists, who I have already shown,have a very poor track record.

Deaths Caused by Global Warming Hoax

The United States is spending about $10 billion a year on Global Warming research. I think it is safe to say that at least $100 billion has been spent worldwide on Global Warming over the last decade. It costs about $20 to provide infrastructure for clean water for one person. According to WHO, 30,000 deaths occur every week from unsafe water and unhygienic living conditions. Most of these deaths are children under five years old. That is over 600,000 deaths per year because of poor water infrastructure. If the $10 billion being wasted on Global Warming research were instead applied to water infrastructure, this could save 50 million lives. Why can’t we say that the Global Warming Hoax has cost the lives of at 6 million people.?

How AGW Advocates Have Lied

“The latest data released by the Met Office, based on readings from 30,000 measuring stations, confirms there has been no global warming for 15 years.”

It is well known that the main driver of the temperature on Earth are the variations in the amount of solar energy the Earth receives. “Experiments at the CERN laboratory in Geneva have supported the theory of Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark that the sun — not man-made CO2 — is the biggest driver of climate change.”

Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen: “The IPCC refused to consider the sun’s effect on the Earth’s climate as a topic worthy of investigation. The IPCC conceived its task only as investigating potential human causes of climate change.”

Goal of AGW

The goal of AGW is to kill capitalism and as a result kill millions of people. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace explained.

(Environmentalism today is) more about globalism and anti-capitalism than it is about science or ecology….

The Environmental Movement is Anti-Human – Pure Evil

“Ultimately, no problem may be more threatening to the Earth’s environment than the proliferation of the human species.”

— Anastasia Toufexis, “Overpopulation: Too Many Mouths,” article in Time’s special “Planet of the Year” edition, January 2, 1989.

“Today, life on Earth is disappearing faster than the days when dinosaurs breathed their last, but for a very different reason….Us homo sapiens are turning out to be as destructive a force as any asteroid. Earth’s intricate web of ecosystems thrived for millions of years as natural paradises, until we came along, paved paradise, and put up a parking lot. Our assault on nature is killing off the very things we depend on for our own lives….The stark reality is that there are simply too many of us, and we consume way too much, especially here at home….It will take a massive global effort to make things right, but the solutions are not a secret: control population, recycle, reduce consumption, develop green technologies.”

“My own doubts came when DDT was introduced. In Guyana, within two years, it had almost eliminated malaria. So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem.”